The Use of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) - Essay Example

American Public System Charles Town, West Virginia Proposal for Research Paper Master of Arts in National Security Studies American Military University Elfonzo J. Hayes 2012 I propose to Professor Mathew Stork, and the Department of National Security Studies, a study of the following topic to be considered in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in National Security Studies: My initial conclusions regarding whether or not terrorist groups are likely to use WMD. Introduction The American nation and its ideology of freedom and equality for all are under constant threat from terrorist organizations who consistently try to force their ideology onto others by spreading fear using hatred, oppression and murder. The disastrous events of September 11, 2001 and other similar attacks on the American nation and on our allies provide proof to that claim. These increasing threats to our very lives have made us adopt better measures on security front although the possibility of another terrorist attack looms consistently over us. In forcing their own ideologies onto free men these terrorists have no regard for loss of human lives including that of women and children, as witnessed throughout our struggle against them these tyrants would use any means necessary to inflict fear amongst us. The use of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) against the United States is dominantly the most considerable threat. These WMDs in form of biological, nuclear and chemical weapons are not easy to acquire but non-state actors belonging to enemy states such as Iran and North Korea or friendly states such as Afghanistan, Pakistan and others consistently try to get their hands on these weapons in order to inflict destruction on a massive scale. In an interview with CNN, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton highlights the concern of WMD when she asserted he biggest threat to America’s national security doesn’t come from North Korea or Iran but from trans-national non-state actors (Clinton 2010). She proclaimed, “Most of us believe the greater threats are the trans-national non-state networks, primarily the extremists, the fundamentalist Islamic extremists who are connected to al Qaeda in the Arab Peninsula or al Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan. They continue to try to increase the sophistication of their capacity, the attacks that they’re going to make and the biggest nightmare we have is that one of these terrorist member organizations within this syndicate of terror will get their hands on a weapon of mass destruction” (CNN 2010). Evidence for WMD usage In the pages that follow we will comprehensively examine the use to weapons of mass destruction and the possibility of terrorists using them against the United States in the homeland to arrive at a conclusion to answer the question of whether terrorist groups are likely to use WMD? Worldwide, the likelihood of terrorists being capable of producing or obtaining WMD may be growing due to looser controls of stockpiles and technology in the former Soviet states in particular, and the broader dissemination of related technology and information in general. However, WMD remain significantly harder to produce or obtain than what is commonly depicted in the press. The Central Intelligence Agency has reported that it is likely that most terrorists will continue to choose conventional explosives over WMD, but warns that the al-Qaeda network has made obtaining WMD capability a very high priority (Bowman 2002). In addition to al-Qaeda, the well-known terror group Hezbollah poses an asymmetrical threat to the homeland. As members of Hezbollah migrate to areas connected to U.S. borders, they have become an increased security threat and since 2006, it has been argued that Hezbollah international patronage networks must be sanctioned upon and banned in United States and in other cooperating countries (Wyler 2011). It has been agreed that the most of the supporters are ethnic Lebanese in South America, North America, Europe, and West Africa who provide some level of support to Hezbollah for ideological or religious reasons donating money through couriers or electronic transfers (House Committee on International Relations 2006). A 1996 investigation revealed members of Hezbollah were arrested in North Carolina and Detroit Michigan for smuggling cigarettes from low tax state, North Carolina to high tax state Detroit, Michigan. The proceeds were transferred to Beirut, Lebanon, at which time “a portion of the money was used to provide material support to the Hezbollah in Lebanon” (Billingslea 2012). Amongst the three, nuclear weapons are most destructive ones, hence acquiring a nuclear weapon has been made near impossible through measures taken by intelligence agencies working round the clock for this purpose while acquiring nuclear technology by enemy states is heavily regulated by International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and resulting sanctions are imposed against such states. In spite of such stern restrictions, conscious efforts have been made by Iran and North Korea for acquiring nuclear technology for building nuclear bombs under the shadow of peaceful nuclear power programs. In addition, recently the activities of Pakistani nuclear scientist A.Q. Khan have raised concern over his possible assistance to al-Qaeda with its pursuit of a dirty bomb. The threat of nuclear material being lost or stolen remains farfetched due to radioactivity of the material used and the advance technology required to maintain, operate, transport and assimilate them. Biological and chemical weapons are easy to acquire and use though the possibility of bringing such weapons to the American soil remains distinctly difficult but the presence of biological and chemical material within United States pose a serious threat. According to an article by Leung (2009), there are 15,000 facilities spread across the United States that contain and store extremely hazardous chemical material, chemicals that can be used by operatives in an event of an attack. A single chemical cloud composed of chlorine or similar gases emerging from one of these chemical facilities in New York can harm or kill 12 million people present in a 14 mile radius, yet the overall security of these plants is not convincing and a weaponized covert attack can result in much devastation to American citizens and economy. It is important to note that these chemical plants present in our own backyards stockpile copious amounts of harmful gases stored in silos that be blown up by a single bullet. Chemicals such as chlorine, sulfur dioxide, ammonia, boron and boron tri-floride can be deadly for human beings; an exposure to these gases can blind the subjects and instantly cause death due to suffocation at a 50 people per minute rate. These compounds are used in our daily products such as detergents, soaps, shampoos and other liquids in the households. The unsaturated quantity in such products is harmless although the saturated gases stored in these chemical plants are deadly. A similar chemical cloud exposure event occurred in Bhopal (India) in 1984 killing 30,000 and injuring 500,000 people, not to mention the use of chlorine for killing war prisoners in World War I by Nazi forces and subway attacks on Japan in 1995 killing 12 and injuring 5,000 people. In comparison, the possibility of using chemical weapons is greater than that of biological weapons, using biological weapons requires highly trained microbiologists and even after such trainings it is very difficult to isolate a deadly human pathogen and expose it to water and food sources used by American citizens. A distinct possibility of acquiring highly deadly pathogens from laboratories and state sponsors remains although acquiring such pathogens is highly regulated by Central for Disease control (CDC) and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). These biological weapons were widely produced, stored and used by many countries from 1960s to 1980s although recent developments in biological research and more stern security measures have minimized the threat of a biological epidemic or outbreak (Casagrande 2000). Conclusion In the heart of democracy lays freedom, the freedom to speak, work, and move freely not only within the country, but in and out of its borders as well. It is this same freedom that raises concern within the US national security apparatus that non-state actors with their desire to inflict mass casualties increasing the number of dead victims may use weapons of mass destruction to meet this objective. Terrorists are constantly on the hunt for materials that can help them in assembling a weapon that can cause massive destruction in the United States. While acquiring a nuclear weapon by these non-state actors or groups remains difficult along with the technology that goes with it, the threat posed by chemical weapons already present in America is considerable and very realistic. Members of these terrorists groups within United States and residing along its bordering areas identified as sleepers can attack an insecure chemical plant and blow up the storage silos in a matter of minutes (Walker and Golestani 2009). Biological weapons are hard to use and even hard to isolate, serve pathogens are not easy to acquire while use of mild pathogens in water or food sources would not affect a population on a large scale. Based on these evidences I conclude that the possibility of terrorists obtaining and using WMDs on US soil remains and such a threat cannot be discounted although usage of chemical weapons is more likely than nuclear or biological means. Bibliography Billingslea, William. 2004. “Illicit Cigarette Trafficking and the Funding of Terrorism.” The Police Chief Magazine. http://www.policechiefmagazine.org/magazine/index.cfm?fuseaction=display_arch&article_id=226&issue_id=22004. Bowman, Steve. 2002. “Weapons of Mass Destruction: The Terrorist Threat.” Congressional Research Service Report for Congress. http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/9184.pdf. Casagrande, Rocco. 2000. “Biological Terrorism targeted at Agriculture: The threat to U.S. National Security.” The Nonproliferation Review 93-104. Clinton, Hilary. 2010. Interview of Hilary Clinton, interview by Candy Crowley, February 6, CNN. http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/02/05/. Joint Hearing Before the Subcommittee on International Terrorism and Nonproliferation and the Subcommittee on the Middle East and Central Asia. 2006. House Committee on International Relations. Leung, Rebecca. 2009. U.S. Plants: Open To Terrorists. http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-583528.html. Walker, Justin and Leila Golestani. 2009. Urban Warfare Analysis Center, Threat Analysis: Hamas and Hezbollah Sleeper Cells Inside the United States. http://understandterror.com/articles/Threat%20Analysis%20-%20Hamas%20and%20Hezbollah%20Sleeper%20Cells%20in%20the%20United%20States.pdf. Wyler, Grace. 2011. “Hezbollah Hooks up With Mexican Drug Cartels.” The Business Insider. Read More